|
Movement Time cannot be- whether a definite act of moving is
meant or a united total made up of all such acts- since movement,
in either sense, takes place in Time. And, of course, if there is
any movement not in Time, the identification with Time becomes
all the less tenable.
In a word, Movement must be distinct from the medium in which it
takes place.
And, with all that has been said or is still said, one
consideration is decisive: Movement can come to rest, can be
intermittent; Time is continuous.
We will be told that the Movement of the All is continuous [and
so may be identical with Time].
But, if the reference is to the Circuit of the heavenly system
[it is not strictly continuous, or equable, since] the time taken
in the return path is not that of the outgoing movement; the one
is twice as long as the other: this Movement of the All proceeds,
therefore, by two different degrees; the rate of the entire
journey is not that of the first half.
Further, the fact that we hear of the Movement of the outermost
sphere being the swiftest confirms our theory. Obviously, it is
the swiftest of movements by taking the lesser time to traverse
the greater space the very greatest- all other moving things are
slower by taking a longer time to traverse a mere segment of the
same extension: in other words, Time is not this movement.
And, if Time is not even the movement of the Kosmic Sphere much
less is it the sphere itself though that has been identified with
Time on the ground of its being in motion.
Is it, then, some phenomenon or connection of Movement?
Let us, tentatively, suppose it to be extent, or duration, of
Movement.
Now, to begin with, Movement, even continuous, has no unchanging
extent [as Time the equable has], since, even in space, it may be
faster or slower; there must, therefore, be some unit of standard
outside it, by which these differences are measurable, and this
outside standard would more properly be called Time. And failing
such a measure, which extent would be Time, that of the fast or
of the slow- or rather which of them all, since these
speed-differences are limitless?
Is it the extent of the subordinate Movement [= movement of
things of earth]?
Again, this gives us no unit since the movement is infinitely
variable; we would have, thus, not Time but Times.
The extent of the Movement of the All, then?
The Celestial Circuit may, no doubt, be thought of in terms of
quantity. It answers to measure- in two ways. First there is
space; the movement is commensurate with the area it passes
through, and this area is its extent. But this gives us, still,
space only, not Time. Secondly, the circuit, considered apart
from distance traversed, has the extent of its continuity, of its
tendency not to stop but to proceed indefinitely: but this is
merely amplitude of Movement; search it, tell its vastness, and,
still, Time has no more appeared, no more enters into the matter,
than when one certifies a high pitch of heat; all we have
discovered is Motion in ceaseless succession, like water flowing
ceaselessly, motion and extent of motion.
Succession or repetition gives us Number- dyad, triad, etc.- and
the extent traversed is a matter of Magnitude; thus we have
Quantity of Movement- in the form of number, dyad, triad, decade,
or in the form of extent apprehended in what we may call the
amount of the Movement: but, the idea of Time we have not. That
definite Quantity is merely something occurring within Time, for,
otherwise Time is not everywhere but is something belonging to
Movement which thus would be its substratum or basic-stuff: once
more, then, we would be making Time identical with Movement; for
the extent of Movement is not something outside it but is simply
its continuousness, and we need not halt upon the difference
between the momentary and the continuous, which is simply one of
manner and degree. The extended movement and its extent are not
Time; they are in Time. Those that explain Time as extent of
Movement must mean not the extent of the movement itself but
something which determines its extension, something with which
the movement keeps pace in its course. But what this something
is, we are not told; yet it is, clearly, Time, that in which all
Movement proceeds. This is what our discussion has aimed at from
the first: "What, essentially, is Time?" It comes to this: we ask
"What is Time?" and we are answered, "Time is the extension of
Movement in Time!"
On the one hand Time is said to be an extension apart from and
outside that of Movement; and we are left to guess what this
extension may be: on the other hand, it is represented as the
extension of Movement; and this leaves the difficulty what to
make of the extension of Rest- though one thing may continue as
long in repose as another in motion, so that we are obliged to
think of one thing Time that covers both Rest and Movements, and,
therefore, stands distinct from either.
What then is this thing of extension? To what order of beings
does it belong?
It obviously is not spatial, for place, too, is something outside
it.
|
|